tv Book Discussion on Marijuana Legalization CSPAN August 6, 2014 11:45pm-12:09am EDT
might not have to ignore this plant anymore. we are going to do this. it's going to be because your remake with the love a lamp was right. thank you for coming. [applause] i don't know how we are doing for time but can i take a couple of questions? >> the upper midwest mainly illinois there any prospect to get into this? i live about 75 miles south of chicago. >> in this the state of illinois? what i think is going to happen is illinois has made great strides in medical cannabis. i mention this because minds are open and by the way person obama voted to legalize hemp as an alibi legislator twice. so missouri is in the forefront.
ohio is pushing hard and texas just gave a talk at rice university. i shouldn't ask a price because the baker institute that brought mean, they get it. one of the reasons they get it in terms of drug policy is because there are a border state and they know what cannabis prohibition does vis-a-vis organize crime and write down from the ambassador to the namesake of the institute to all the researchers there are totally on board. i guess i should say to my surprise texas is ready on hemp. i actually think just as california is often paving the way for things that happen across the nation and across the west i think texas is going to be the reverberation across the midwest because that's an easier vote for in illinois republican cultivating it in texas. i think illinois will most likely follow missouri and ohio.
i think they will be the first in the midwest. >> it's near a standard oil area and gary indiana. we are stuck in a horrible cycle. we have had their land since 1865 but the bank runs it and we are paying a lot. we have all inherited it but we are not making good use of it. we have a fine farmhouse and people want to live in it. it's the highest land location in the county, eight miles from indiana. the whole history of the tippecanoe battle and all of that. people are misinformed but the thing is it's all the petrochemicals, all the adjoining farms. farmers now, when we harvest
across all farms like mowing the yard one team of men. it's just stuck in a syndrome of the high cost of what they call inputs. >> first of all it sounds like a plan for remediation. soil restoration from the petrochemical and i'm glad you mention this because besides the strictly physical soil remediation its land use and putting farmers back in control of their land with a crop that can make them a living. that is what the ultimate goal is. >> it sure is. >> i would like to see it happen in illinois. everybody from illinois with input contact your legislator and get hemp rolling in illinois. >> bill gates just bought a whole section near our farm and its big farmers. selling it off a section at a time.
we are just a small farm. >> how many acres? >> two-thirds of a half acre. we are in a real syndrome. this spring all the nearby farms and the thinking is stuck in illinois. >> linda. >> i just want to encourage anyone who's interested in knowing more about this as it unfolds in colorado to check out the rocky mountain hemp association.org web site. there's also a button there where you can become a member. we welcome everyone. we want it to be the networking web site for farmers and industry and anyone who's interested in any aspect of this unfolding of hemp in the united states released in colorado. rocky mountain hemp association.org. thank you. >> i'm a member and i forgot to introduce suzanne. this is a colorado senator who
put forth a very early first efforts. linda can speak to the specifics better than i can but this was i don't know a day to see colorado farmers cultivate commercial hemp it must feel pretty good and thank you for getting the early seeds of this going literally. one more question, okay. >> 100-dollar nacre profit how much is driven by prohibition? as agriculture were to expand across america the net price would have to come down significantly. >> that's a trick or question. i might looking for examples where i can insert a tad bit as david would say curbing of the enthusiasm. it's difficult because hemp is going to be huge.
it's a very unique situation. on the one hand of course current prices are no guarantee. every embarrassment -- investment advisers is now guaranteed a profit. will there be profits of hemp or ever? you can't make any assumption that way but the curve of demand is not only so strongly upward, it hasn't even reached that malfusian where it takes off y yet. the canadians are desperate. the processors in canada are desperate for american farmers to get the seed planted because of how much demand is growing. at least in the foreseeable future future i believe farmers will see profits in growth for seed oil and if that winds up stabilizing keep in mind 100 dollar an acre is more than twice what they farmers making for corn or soy. even if that stabilizes i think hemp is here to stay.
it is true that this is a new industry for the u.s.. most new into she's sale. most new businesses fail. we can't guarantee that this is going to be an automatic success but hemp is not new. the benefits of hemp, the persians call it the king of seeds. i don't want to lay my own spiritualism on anyone else but if you are a religious person genesis chapter 1, the first chapter of the bible, verse 29 says you shall have all the plants and seeds to use, not unless some dude like richard nixon comes along and says there are couple we don't like. thank you all. [applause]
>> pepperdine pepperdine university angela hawken sat down with booktv to discuss the pros and cons of marijuana legalization. this interview recorded at pepperdine university in california as part of booktv's college series. >> host: . >> host: the book is called "marijuana legalization" what everyone needs a now published that for university press. one of the co-authors editors is angela hawken who is a public policy professor at pepperdine university where we are on location. angela hawken is this book pro-or anti-legalization? >> guest: neither and that is what makes it -- and the market. none of us agree with each other on legalization and that is the genius of oxford university press bringing together for
opinions and together figuring out what the true evidence base is. the problem with the issues surrounding marijuana is there are such such strong ethics he groups on both sides of the issue that the issue that's on the publicly that they now have no idea which direction they are in pulled in. the idea is to get for people to disagree on issue legalization to agree on the facts surrounding marijuana. >> host: where you stand personally on the issue? >> guest: why was hoping you wouldn't affect another you did in chapter 16 of the book each author was required to publicly basically declare their position on the subject and for many of us who are academics that's an uncomfortable thing to do because you don't want to show your hand. in their research would provide as unbiased as we are able to do set of perspectives on this case were asked to show our hand. at the four authors i was the one that was most in favor of marijuana legalization which i think was surprising to many. >> host: why are you in favor? >> guest: well as i said in
the chapter my drug of choice, i'm a cradle anglican had my first drink of wine when i was 13 years old during communion and i'm a regular consumer and reasonable and safe consumer of wine. my drug of choice is alcohol. for others their drug of choice is marijuana and in terms of social harms the social harms of alcohol far dominate the social harms of marijuana. the policy analyst have really wanted to see the laws handle the substance and didn't see there was a strong case for being aggressively anti-marijuana use in the face of very relaxed given the risk with alcohol use in the harms associated are so much greater for alcohol than marijuana. the question you didn't ask me which "cnn" has done to my colleagues as soon as the interview start is heavy use and are you a user? you are a pro legalizers so you
are clearly a user. my team had been working with the state of washington drafting the states regulations and we ask the questions often are you a user and who is advising the government? for a while the position taken by the team was simply not to answer the question. the only good way since the question of are you a pot user but i'm willing to tell you today is tight of a fact that i'm one of the four authors most in favor i'm not a user. i really did come to this without a horse in the race and someone looking at the data and concerned with what i've seen. >> host: what is the acceptability of marijuana use in the united states and maybe even here in california? >> guest: it is change quickly over time and this is why we are seeing strong momentum around marijuana and the rhetoric around marijuana is changing. pew reported findings from the
summer of 2013 looking at where the public is on the issue and at that moment at that time it may change by now but 50% of americans were in favor of legalizing marijuana. many of the majority of the public supporting something like that politicians have to pay attention. politicians tend to be rather fickle. what we have noticed is the language surrounding marijuana use is changing and california did not pass marijuana legalization when voters went to the polls in 2010, 2012. i think it's 2010. it was not passed them by a narrow margin up past. since the book was published to plan the release date to surround the time of voters going to the voting polls. we were surprised. my co-authors thought more states will tip. i predicted they would have one and possibly two states living
in the direction of legalization. >> host: when is are going to be on the ballot in california? >> guest: you know i believe the real big advocacy players are in california and 2016 and in fact for a few years now it's been the chatter and the big push would be 2006 and i would be the important election year. i would be surprised if other states don't in the meantime and be surprised if a few states don't in 2014 so california would be a lacquer state. .. aggressive taste for marijuana than that. we are running at three times. >> host: so 10%. the. >> guest: nl last year 13 million americans smoked marijuana. most of them about a third of those were people who we call
the experimenters someone who will really think of it as being something quite radical. they have the drag and a smoke of puff. about a third of that as people who are the unusual experimenters. it's not a way of life for them and that we have a relatively sizable share of the population who are social smokers. they will smoke once in a while because they have peers who are smoking and is really another way of life but there's a group of people about 20% of marijuana users for whom this is really way of life. they spoke every day or every couple of days and some of them will go want to have an issue with abuse or dependency. marijuana is different from some of the illegal drugs in terms of abuse and dependency so if you look at people who are regular consumers of marijuana for example people who use every two days or more often and daily users or every two days, about a third of marijuana users who use that much meet clinical criteria
able to get things done. they self disclose is having tried to quit and haven't managed to quit the people who do meet those political criteria even though they are a minority have serious issues and trying to move on to a life that doesn't include the use of the substance. >> host: angela hawken with a medical marijuana laws is that i way around legalization and punishment? >> guest: at the jerry's depending on the state you are in. in california it's essentially if you went to venice beach is notorious you could look at the long list of ailments and they will tell you what to complain about and he will meet with the recommendations in a few minutes so essentially it's become a very easy environment in which to obtain, essentially legal access to marijuana. but the legalization of marijuana and that commercial legalization is different from medical marijuana and that it really allows the production and
sale of marijuana for nonmedical use, for recreational use. in the book i describe medical marijuana in detail and my concerns about medical marijuana according to the california model where really they -- these doctors have made a fuss. there are some people who have serious medical issues who are turning to marijuana for relief. they turn out to be a tiny percentage of the total number of medical marijuana users. about 5% have what we would consider diagnosable reason for carrying a medical marijuana card. the rest are probably people who enjoy amusing -- enjoyed using marijuana. as i said i'm in favor of legalization side no reason to be unhappy about that except i don't like is somebody who is willing to lie to a doctor to obtain a card has no problem where someone who does want to make those false statements does. i think it creates an uncomfortable system.
i have some real concerns about how it is played out in some states. >> host: what kind of tax revenues has california garnered from medical marijuana and what are the early results from colorado? >> guest: colorado has been fascinating to watch. the last few months we have seen taxation results released and advocacy groups from the beginning were talking massive tax benefits in many states looking for additional source of revenue is very appealing. in some of the states the idea of marijuana legalization being a cure for problems sounded very appealing. the initial estimates most of us thought were too high. the tax revenues would not be nearly as high as the advocacy group had implied. the results came out in colorado
and the tax revenues were much higher. suddenly we were wrong in our understanding of this. if you look closely what happened in colorado in the early after when pot was made legal there wasn't sufficient legal supplies. supply and demand will tell you if you ever do supply and there's a lot of tourism. people came to colorado to use because it was the first movement around it so a lot of people came into colorado. there was limited supply so prices skyrocketed. there was an artificial blips surrounding the law. colorado itself has issued statements saying their protections for tax revenue in colorado aren't nearly, not nearly as rosy as the initial data suggested so my guess is that tax revenues, there will be tax revenues. they won't be nearly as big as
initially predicted an part of that is because of reductions in price. as morris produced and as the producers get better producing it we are likely to see downward pressure on prices. some of my co-workers believe there will be a sizable reduction in plummeting in prices. the nature of how marijuana is produced and running a business in general there are natural costs involved in any sort of business operation that will keep the price is higher than we might have suggested in the book. it's one of the things we should have -- [inaudible] >> host: is there an association with crime and marijuana? >> guest: it's so interesting. the association between drug use and crime is muddled. all the criminal literature and none can show a true causal relationship between drug use and crime. the idea is there a many reasons why people might be involved in
crime and drug use at the same time. some people commit crimes to finance their drug use. marijuana is an expensive so the economic motivation for marijuana users isn't especially a compelling argument. some people might commit crime because of the physiological response to the drug and somehow the drug makes them predisposed to commit a crime. the evidence in madison very good and the drug that comes closest to that is methamphetamine. the physiological relationship is slight. the lip laboratory experiments were with mice and they would load up these mice with methamphetamine. you have to give mice near lethal doses and they don't behave all that differently. what happened with marijuana users is there with aggression associated with it. much like with heroin users if
someone uses heroin the guy in the corner goes to sleep essentially. the causal uses between drug use and crime are complicated and often where the criminal elements as come and is sometimes the trade related to the drug rather than a drug use itself. and of course drinking and driving or driving under the influence is a crime and will marijuana legalization lead to an increase in drunk driving is an important question. someone like myself who says i've might be willing to see legalization play out would quickly change my mind if i see results from washington and colorado and they show an increase in drunk driving or more partly if the results show marijuana and alcohol use together. if an increase in marijuana use is accompanied by an increase in alcohol use i will fundamentally change my mind on marijuana legalization. we will learn in the next few years. if many of us who are academics studying the marijuana issue want to see that result. the other issue